Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force today"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...truth-We-send-task-force-Falklands-today.html

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

That article is riddled with holes, typical gash Mail journalism.

Just one of many innacuracies is: We are also down to one effective aircraft carrier, HMS Illustrious. Unfortunately, its pilots and Harrier GR9 bombers are now stationed almost permanently in Afghanistan. The Sea Harriers that proved so useful in the Falklands have long since gone to the scrapheap.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

Interesting article, - but a little negative.

For a start we have we have 2 carriers (not 1 as the article describes), Ocean, Bulwark, Albion, the very capable Bay class landing ships, and more nuclear submarines armed with Tomahawk etc.

That being said we are short on destroyers and harriers. Endurance has also once again returned home with her future in doubt after her mishap.

The only positive in all of this is that it keeps the navy in the headlines during a very political defence review....

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

We've got plenty of Harriers to do the job, and plenty of pilots. Anyone doubting their Air to Air capability can rest assured that they smashed up the incredibly capable Gripen over Norway last summer.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

Tally Ho Velvet Leader! down there on the left! Stukas!

Roger. Here we go, attacking now. Yellow Section keep your eyes peeled for the escort

Even a Spitfire can't be in two places at once

 

Perhaps this is exactly what's needed to shake-up the CDS and the Government and their narrow-minded view on Defence and long-term security. Sorry Monty, but when it comes to Air-to-Air a radar-less Harrier with 2 AIM9s is no match for a Sea Harrier with Blue Vixen radar and 4 AMRAAM. In 2005 we were kicking F-15 ass at Lakenheath, taking 'em down before they could even see us - the Yanks didn't like that one little bit.

A repeat of 1982 is just whats needed to get Broone to WAKE UP and realise that scrapping Sea Harrier has created a huge capability gap with regard to Maritime Organic Air Defence.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

It does make you wonder whether with JSF costing 150M each that we should get an updated Harrier for a fraction of the cost and just have more.

Money could then be plowed into more OPV's etc.

 

So much of today's problems are down to poor perception management by our so-called government. Do you think if the Argies would be rattling sabres at all if Broon and his circus had any credibility ovewr matters of Defence?

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

Oh Dear Mr Bear, dream on!!! heres what went down last time :wink: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_naval_forces_in_the_Falklands_War#Royal_Navy

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

That task force is probably bigger than our entire fleet now. :cry:

 

I have an Op Corporate poster from Navy News up on the wall here at Blandford to wind up the Percys and YES, that Task Force was bigger than our current Fleet by some way. 8O

As for the Argies, just the normal chest beating old 'Latino machismo' stuff to deflect away the fact they are in financial trouble once again. :wink:

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

Not saying it's better than the FA2 mate, not by any means. Merely pointing out that the GR hasn't exactly been soundly thrashed as expected against Typhoon / Gripen etc.

They haven't been in Afghanistan since June 09.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

A fair point but can you recall the WX state at the time? The MK1 eyeball is pretty good in CAVOK but becomes progressively more useless in anything less.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

As far as the comparisons go!!.I still think we couds muster a task force if need be

 

Re 82. Must give a mention, to the Sidewinder AIM9Ls, borrowed :wink: from the Septics???

 

We would do it anyway - there may have to be a few more fingers crossed but of course we could muster a task force and of course we would give it our best shot - that is what BritMil does... it's just that the job gets harder every time the planners take a stickybeak at the task and the available assets to achieve the task.

The best option is to hang onto the FI (or any other territory) and not let Johnnie Foreigner get a toehold in the first place. It is easier to defend and resupply than to recapture. (note I said easier not easy!)

 

To be honest, many of those ships, T21s, T12s due to thier awful surveillance radars were incapable of decent air defence, although we have a far leaner fleet, I would dare to say that it is far more capable. We have learnt many lessons from '82, but I'm assuming so have the Argies. Not that the Argies would ever amount another invasion, somehow in todays world of instant communication, any hint of mobilisation would be seen straight away at whitehall and we would not be so surprised as we were then.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

My mate who goes shooting pheasants or is that peasants? And know's everything about shooting and warfare watching Sky and shooting animals makes you an expert.

Well he said we don't need them there destroyer's we have lotsa submarines the silent killers. Sorry but I am right was his last word on the subject.

Now can any of you deck apes explain the technological side of things regarding this matter.

 

Re: Mail: "The bitter truth: We couldn't send Task Force tod

When the announcement was first made that we we moving to an all-Harrier II fleet, us Zoomies naturally assumed that somehow the Blue Vixen would be fitted to the GR7 to retain an Air-to-Air capability. It would have been feasible to do this. In fact, there is already a Harrier that does this - the AV8B Plus:-

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/av8b/index.htm



The BV is a far more capable radar than the APG-65 currently fitted to the AV8B Plus and would have given us a true multirole carrier-borne aircraft with AMRAAM, AIM9 and all the heavy mud-moving stuff as well. In short, it would have given us the best of the F/A2 and GR7/9 in one airframe. The US, Spain and Italy have this capability - we don't.

Unfortunately our Lords and Masters decided to go with a completely Ground Attack Harrier, arguing that we don't fight wars like the Falklands anymore ( 8O ) and in any case, JSF will provide that capability ( 8O ) and in the meantime T45 will fill the capability gap ( 8O ).

I'd say that hindsight is a wonderful thing - but enough people argued at the time that it was a bad move to scrap Sea Harrier without replacing it, the Government decided not to listen.

*******.

 

Yes the TF may have been larger, but lets be honest with ourselves - a lot of the escorts in it were very old, and almost totally obsolete. They had guns, seacat and wasp and err, thats it (a few may have had exocet too). Only 2 seawolf and 5 seadart equipped vessels present, and only 3 / 8 in the whole RN in total.

Fast forward now and every frigate has seawolf, and we've still got 5 dart equipped vessels. The Merlin / Lynx combo also works well too. In absolute extremis then we could probably test fire Sea Viper on an Argentine aircraft if we needed to. We've got better kit, better radars, better missiles and more importantly, its designed incorporating the painful lessons learned last time.

The Argentines have the same kit, the same radars and the same missiles and havent been able to maintain it properly for a very long time.